Assessing driving risk through unsupervised detection of anomalies in telematics time series data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Vehicle telematics provides granular data for dynamic driving risk assessment, but current methods often rely on aggregated metrics (e.g., harsh braking counts) and do not fully exploit the rich time-series structure of telematics data. In this paper, we introduce a flexible framework using continuous-time hidden Markov model (CTHMM) to model and analyse trip-level telematics data. Unlike existing methods, the CTHMM models raw time-series data without predefined thresholds on harsh driving events or assumptions about accident probabilities. Moreover, our analysis is based solely on telematics data, requiring no traditional covariates such as driver or vehicle characteristics. Through unsupervised anomaly detection based on pseudo-residuals, we identify deviations from normal driving patterns—defined as the prevalent behaviour observed in a driver’s history or across the population—which are linked to accident risk. Validated on both controlled and real-world datasets, the CTHMM effectively detects abnormal driving behaviour and trips with increased accident likelihood. In real data analysis, higher anomaly levels in longitudinal and lateral accelerations consistently correlate with greater accident risk, with classification models using this information achieving ROC-AUC values as high as 0.86 for trip-level analysis and 0.78 for distinguishing drivers with claims. Furthermore, the methodology reveals significant behavioural differences between drivers with and without claims, offering valuable insights for insurance applications, accident analysis, and prevention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".